A bright day for Warriors who gave their
all but have been rejected by their government.

Fort
Walton Beach, Fla  Retired Col George Bud Day, Medal
of Honor recipient and former POW in Hanoi is pleased to announce United
States Representatives Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Chet Edwards (D-TX),
Jeff Miller (R-FL) and Randy Duke Cunningham (R-CA) introduced
a revised version of the "Keep Our Promise to America's Military
Retirees Act" on 11/06/2003 now numbered HR 3474. This bipartisan
bill addresses recent developments and offers meaningful remedies to
the "broken promise" of health care for military retirees.

This
Bill, HR 3474, introduced yesterday is clearly great news in dealing
with a gross injustice to our WWII/Korea era warriors, says Col
George Bud Day, USAF, Ret, attorney, Medal of Honor recipient,
and former POW in Hanoi. While the legal fight is over, our legislative
efforts have taken center focus to move forward on the contract that
was partially satisfied by TRICARE for Life remarks Col Day. We
should never have been forced to wage this fight, but it was required,
we took the challenge, and since the legal action ended, my energies
have been focused toward a comprehensive legislative victory.
Col Day urges A mountain of letters, phone calls, email, faxes,
to now flood Senator's and Representatives offices encouraging support
for quick, positive, legislative action.

Following
is a quote from Congressman Chris Van Hollen's press release which Col
Day, former plaintiff Robert Reinlie, and Class Act Group endorses.

Over
the past year the Courts have laid to rest the question of who is responsible
for making good on promises of lifetime health care that were made to
young men and women who joined the service during World War II and the
Korean eras, said Van Hollen. Recruits were promised by
their own government that if they served a career of 20 years in military
service, then they and their dependants would receive health care upon
retirement. But while these career soldiers put their lives on the line
for our country, the government did not keep its end of the contract.

This
past June the U.S. Supreme Court decided not to consider a November
18, 2002 Federal Appeals Court ruling in a suit filed against the government
of the United States on behalf of World War II and Korean era military
retirees. Retired Air Force Colonel George Bud Day, a highly
decorated Congressional Medal of Honor recipient, filed a breach of
contract suit on behalf of two retired colonels who contended they had
been recruited into military service as young men with the promise of
lifetime health care upon retirement after serving at least 20 years
in uniform.

In
1956, long after Col. Day's clients signed up for military duty, Congress
enacted the first laws that defined, and began to limit, the level of
health care that would be provided to military retirees. These laws,
which took effect in December 7, 1956, made health care available at
military facilities conditioned on space availabilityin other
words, military retirees had to go to the end of the line and wait for
health care. Subsequent laws removed them entirely from the military
health care system when they became eligible for Medicare, resulting
in a dramatic reduction in health care benefits.

The
Appeals Court ruled against the plaintiffs on a technicality, arguing
that promises by recruiters were invalid because only Congress could
authorize military health care, which Congress had not done when the
plaintiffs entered the service, said Van Hollen. But although
the retired colonels lost their case on that technicality, I believe
they won their moral battle on principle.

The
Court ruling said, in part, We cannot readily imagine more sympathetic
plaintiffs than the retired officers of the World War II and Korean
War era involved in this case. They served their country for at least
20 years with the understanding that when they retired they and their
dependents would receive full free health care for life. The promise
of such health care was made in good faith and relied upon. . . . Perhaps
Congress will consider using its legal power to address the moral claims
raised by Schism and Reinlie on their own behalf, and indirectly for
other affected retirees.

Van
Hollen continued, The Keep Our Promise to America's Military Retirees
Act was originally introduced in 1999 to acknowledge the promises made
in good faith to America's military retirees. But now that the Courts
have ruled that only Congress can make good on promises made to our
military retirees, it is more important than ever that Congress pass
this bill. Van Hollen noted that the new bill offers more meaningful
restitution for broken promises by waiving both the Part B premium and
the late fee for World War II and Korean era military retirees.

The
new bill also addresses broken promises made to military retirees who
joined the service after 1956. Even though laws were on the books
beginning in 1956 that defined and limited military retiree health care,
he said, the sad truth is that the empty promise of lifetime health
care was used as a recruiting tool for many years beyond the scope of
the Col. Day's case, to those who entered the military after 1956. This
is documented in recruiting literature well into the 1990s. We must
keep our promises to them, too.

These
retirees, mainly from the Vietnam and Persian Gulf eras, qualify for
the military health care program known generally as Tricare. Tricare
works well for many military retirees but fails to deliver quality health
care for others, said Van Hollen. Some retirees cannot receive
care at military bases due to lack of space availability. Base closures
have cut off access for many retirees, and too many of them cannot find
private doctors who will put up with bureaucratic inefficiencies or
low reimbursements they have encountered with Tricare.

Van
Hollen believes strongly that military retirees who are not well served
by Tricare deserve an alternative. The Keep Our Promise Act offers these
retirees the option of enrolling in the Federal Employees Health Benefits
Program (FEHBP); the new version of the bill improves this benefit for
military retirees by reimbursing them for expenses they incur under
FEHBP that they would not have been incurred under Tricare. This
provision is cost-neutral since the government would be covering these
health care expenses under one program or the other, said Van
Hollen.

The
Courts have ruled. It is up to Congress to make good on the promises
that were madeand brokento our military retirees. They are
not asking for handoutsthey ask only for what was promised to
them and what they earned, said Van Hollen.

Col
Day remarks, The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal
Circuit in their November 18, 2002 ruling clearly acknowledge a moral
obligation the United States Government has to military retirees. Their
ruling urges Congress to also acknowledge and enact legislation that
will move forward in correcting this long standing medical care injustice.

Col
Day continues, After nearly seven years of legal and legislative
efforts, the revised 'Keep Our Promise To America's Military Retirees
Act' HR 3474 of 2003 will bring millions of military retirees, dependents,
and widows another step in their quest for earned medical care. God
bless every single beneficiary for their patience and faith in our government
to do the right thing.